#### Science Forum

Proper Knob
Science 14 Sep '09 21:37
1. Proper Knob
Cornovii
14 Sep '09 21:37
A question for the mathemeticians among us. Maybe this question has been asked and answered before, forgive me if it has.

Let's just say the Genesis account of the Bible is true, God created Adam and Eve and put them on Earth 6,000yrs ago.

Would it be possible for the worlds population to have reached what it is today form only two people 6,000yrs ago? What sort of number of children would each couple have to produce to reach the current population number.
2. Palynka
Upward Spiral
14 Sep '09 22:061 edit
Originally posted by Proper Knob
A question for the mathemeticians among us. Maybe this question has been asked and answered before, forgive me if it has.

Let's just say the Genesis account of the Bible is true, God created Adam and Eve and put them on Earth 6,000yrs ago.

Would it be possible for the worlds population to have reached what it is today form only two people 6,000yrs ...[text shortened]... of number of children would each couple have to produce to reach the current population number.
It's possible. If you consider a "net" rate of births (net of pre-birth fatalities), then almost any such rate above 2 would grow exponentially very fast. For simplicity, every couple has all kids at the age of 20 and dies at the age of 80 (this is only relevant to see how many people are alive at the end).

For example. If you start with a population of 100, with a "net" rate of births above 2.2 at the age of 20, consider only the number of possible couples*, then after 4000 years I get something like 16,709,250,006 births, a net growth of population of 4,155,343,163 (births-deaths) and a total population of 14,489,066,583. As you can see, the generation who's dying (born 80 years before current and only parented at 20) is 4 times smaller than the current one!

*i.e. 100/2 = 50; 50*2.2 = 110; 110/2=55;55*2.2=121;121/2=60.5 so round down to 60 couples

Edit - The problem with this back of the envelope calculations is that "net" rates of birth are poor instruments to simulate reality, as you can see.
3. 14 Sep '09 22:08
The assumption that I've heard is that people doubled every 150 years as they use in the source of a lot of creationist crap comes from:

4. Palynka
Upward Spiral
14 Sep '09 22:11
Originally posted by PsychoPawn
The assumption that I've heard is that people doubled every 150 years as they use in the source of a lot of creationist crap comes from:

World population doubled from the 60s to present day.
5. Proper Knob
Cornovii
14 Sep '09 23:03
Originally posted by Palynka
World population doubled from the 60s to present day.
Thanks for the reply, and i need to tap into your mathematical brain again.

According to scripture the Great Flood wiped out all the Earths population around 4300yrs and only left Noah, his wife, their three sons and their wives and a host of animals.

If only the sons and wifes produced offspring, what could the population reach in 1500yrs?
6. Palynka
Upward Spiral
14 Sep '09 23:28
With the same net birth rate as before I'd get just over 110,000. But the thing is that rate is purely made-up by me. To get 6 billion, you'd need a rate of about 2.535. Even just 0.1 small differences in the rate would give you huge differences. A rate of 3 would give you almost 2 quadrillion!

Basically, almost anything is "possible" by small tweaks in the rate that accumulate exponentially...
7. 15 Sep '09 00:13
Originally posted by Proper Knob
A question for the mathemeticians among us. Maybe this question has been asked and answered before, forgive me if it has.

Let's just say the Genesis account of the Bible is true, God created Adam and Eve and put them on Earth 6,000yrs ago.

Would it be possible for the worlds population to have reached what it is today form only two people 6,000yrs ...[text shortened]... of number of children would each couple have to produce to reach the current population number.
I have thought the same thing from time to time. My gears do not work well enough to calculate it either. Another thing I have thought about is what size and displacement Noahs ark was in order to have two of every living thing put onboard. I doubt that Noahs small crew could have handled the onboard Zoo. How long would it take to round up the animals and get them onboard? It just doesn't seem likely to me that it happened that way or at all. Salt water fish would have had their habitat diluted with a large amount of fresh water. All the different bugs in the world could have floated on debris and the birds could have perched on debris but the animals alone is too big of a job. The wars that have happened in the last 6000 years would have to have had a huge impact on current population.
8. 15 Sep '09 00:42
Originally posted by Palynka
World population doubled from the 60s to present day.
Ok....
9. wolfgang59
invigorated
15 Sep '09 10:57
Originally posted by joe beyser
I have thought the same thing from time to time. My gears do not work well enough to calculate it either. Another thing I have thought about is what size and displacement Noahs ark was in order to have two of every living thing put onboard. I doubt that Noahs small crew could have handled the onboard Zoo. How long would it take to round up the animals and ...[text shortened]... ave happened in the last 6000 years would have to have had a huge impact on current population.
Just for info
the bible does not say two of each animal!

It's SEVEN of each clean animal (some say seven pairs) and TWO of each unclean (some say two pair)

So even more of a husbandry problem!!

No mention of kangaroos either!!
10. wolfgang59
invigorated
15 Sep '09 10:58
Just who did Adam & Eve's offspring marry?
11. 15 Sep '09 13:04
Originally posted by wolfgang59
Just who did Adam & Eve's offspring marry?
they had sons and daughters, they were not like, ummm, monks or nuns or anything, but take it too the spirituality forum, my friend noobster often come there to get his own misconceptions cleared up ðŸ™‚
12. 15 Sep '09 13:08
Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Incest is best...an affair the whole family can enjoy ðŸ˜‰
13. 15 Sep '09 13:38
Originally posted by PsychoPawn
Incest is best...an affair the whole family can enjoy ðŸ˜‰
yeah best for you Canadian hill billy's ðŸ˜›
14. 15 Sep '09 15:28
Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yeah best for you Canadian hill billy's ðŸ˜›
No such thing as a Canadian Hillbilly. ðŸ˜›

I guess after Adam and Eve discovered sin all their children had no problem with screwing their siblings.... but then the bible hadn't been written yet so how could they have known what was moral?
15. wolfgang59
invigorated
15 Sep '09 16:02
No morality before the bible?